gaggle
-
Posts
3,586 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Store
Posts posted by gaggle
-
-
No I am not confusing the two, the FOI has the exemption for commercially sensitive information and the rents paid by individual renters would be sensitive as not infrequently rents are different depending on a variety of things at the time of the setting of the rent.
As for the DPA I make no mention of commercially sensitive, think you need to read it again and work out when data becomes personal.
I am not sure that the bars and shops rent the premises from CRT , maybe that they pay a property company that has interests on the estate.
-
I didn't miss it. Any Tom, Dick or Harry could write that in an email, doesn't mean it is true.
Don't be such a silly sausage , grow up , I have spoke with the vessel owner and can confirm that he is in contact with mr Dunkley , please do not go on another of your silly argument for argument sake games to disrupt a thread , stop trolling people who are trying shed some light onto CRT antics .
-
3
-
-
I know you "get off" on being rude on internet forums but you really are a bit of a stuck record on this (and all other) occasions - I've already stated that I'd be very interested to hear why the ship needed to be taken from Liverpool. I'd await the evidence. If you're holding stuff back, then basing opinions on it and posting, then its not much use to anyone except yourself. I for one, can't take you seriously any more since your posts seem to have this single theme running through them.
KETTLE , POT , what is your theme ? nearly nine and a half thousand posts , you certainly have a lot to say about or in support of something , maybe CRT and how great they are are .
-
Would have been so much simpler if he'd just paid for the services he was using though, wouldn't it?
He could have just sat around the dock begging money from people as they passed by , I heard plenty of people make good money doing it in Liverpool , even a man with a carboard instrument.
-
Just renewed and made a point of asking about what ,if anything i would need to do for the renewal as the boat was now over ten years old , no need for survey i was told it is simply a normal renewal.
-
Well honey, he wanted to ask it too. As is his wont. And who mentioned 10 boats, you do make stuff up my lovely.
BTW I'm certain there were only 3 more boats each way when I went in and out. Boats set off out at 8am and in at 1pm, on the same day. Except Tuesdays.
Edited cos I can, with Kisses on the bottom!or would you prefer a Goose?
CRT issued new rules to allow up to 10 boats down the locks , up from the previous limit of six per day , also the passage through the assisted bridges times , not saying that ten do go in or out daily but they now will allow that number , mooring up between maghull " bridge 10 ? " and Stanley locks also had changes made.
-
I hate to get back on topic and spoil everyone's fun, but it does seem that the owner was told all this in May and was then asked to provide a valid hull survey for Planet, including ultrasonic hull plate thickness readings, and evidence that it was insured.. And that the boat would be removed. It's now September. That the owner is STILL surprised that he owes any money probably just proves he's a true Liverpudlian...
Read the sites on the link re the survey insurance etc , story in paper stated CRT removed vessel because of unpaid berting/mooring fee,s , not sure but I think you will find others have explained in great detail that CRT have no legal right to remove take possession of vessel for unpaid debts.
As for your true Liverpudlian remark , is it the boat that's the maggot .
-
use them but never claimed , take my money ok though with no fuss
-
shocking
more reason you can be grateful to others I would say.
-
Equally can it be proved that "most boats around abide by the rules they also cant stand crt ".
Right luv have you not noticed that phylis has already asked that question ?
A locky working the Stanley flight last week told me the docks were owned by Peel, CRT had an agreement allowing 6 boats a day in and out. So CRT not Peel collect boat fees etc on the docks?
BTW I'm happy with the interactions I have with CRT. Tho not with some of the stuff I hear here.
Well CRT are breaking the agreement if that's the case as I am sure numbers in and out are now 10 , not sure if it is in daily and out daily , it was alternate days for in or out , just glad it can be used more by more.
-
Where is your proof of this?
I would say it is a load of bullox myself
Yes dear of course you would , can you prove it though
-
Do you have any contact details for the owners ? If so will you please PM them to me.
ONLY WHATS ON HERE SORRY WWW.MRMSW.CO.UK , the working link to that site is contained within the ste linked to on post no 2 in this thread , sorry for some reason my computer is not alloing me to copy and paste links or urls of sites http://www.mrmsw.co.uk/
-
Liverpool echo has pics of CRT on board making ready to remove , shame is they are using local lads who take boats down the link to do this ,a tug is alongside in picture , owner has paid some bills and claims he was unaware other monies due are in fact overdue. story is in tonights paper and for some reason I am unable to copy and post the url to link on here
-
Yes fair enough , fact is this year I may have made one trip into Manchester because the antics of this sonny character , camera or not he seems to be out and about looking for confrontation which I just cant be bothered with .
-
Its clear to see you're the one twisting the argument (I have no idea why......) I can't see any point in trying to debate with you when you fail to comprehend things properly.
I understand you made a statement that in your opinion photographs can be taken through the windows of a boat as the boat is in a public place , can I ask if you are willing to walk along a stretch of canal and take say fifty pics through boat windows that have people aboard and report back with the reactions of the occupants when you tell them you will do as you like because it a public place
-
You're the odd one for bringing up kids - look at the first post, there's no mention of them.
I've not extended it to "welcome aboard for anyone" - that's in your mind too. Clearly it is not right to simply step onto someone's boat without permission.
And to stoop so low as to suggest I take pics of kids because I'm in a public place - what a bizarre tactic to take in a discussion on an internet forum. I think you need to wind your neck in.
Might I suggest you concentrate on the facts in hand, rather than let your mind get carried away with different scenarios or invent stuff I've said to argue against. The facts are, the canal is a public place, so the general public are free to be in the area, including taking pictures (this does not apply in swimming pools, sports centres, etc). And I've already stated that putting a camera against a boat window to take a picture of its interior is unacceptable. I don't need to add any more to that.
It was more pointing out that NO WAY would you dream of pointing your camera at anyone including children in a public place such as a park or baths , yet you argue that it ok because its a boat on the canal , forum rules say I must not use bad language , but politely , go away , at best your trolling
-
1
-
-
Sorry to say but suggesting this rubbish about getting him onto the sex offenders register is a load of tosh. The boat is in a public place, your curtains are open (otherwise you'd not see him taking a pic, right?), its not a bedroom or bathroom clearly, so its a step too far to suggest he's trying to get dodgy pics - and if he does you must be some kind of exhibitionist.
By all means its not acceptable to be sticking a camera to photograph the interior of a boat but it seems like its just an intimidation tactic. Let's keep a sense of proportion here otherwise there's a danger you won't be taken seriously (cry wolf etc).
This post suggests ANYONE on a boat that happens to be in what may be deemed as a dodgy picture MUST be an exhibitionist , so my grandchildren being dressed on board of a morning have no right to protection from a voyeur who happens to pass by taking pictures ,the cabin is not a public place.
Don't look for attention by posting crap and you wont get attention
-
1
-
-
Yes if it were done in a public place, which includes being in a boat moored on a canal with the curtains open.
Very strange man with strange opinion , your saying the cabin is a public place , well welcome aboard for anyone who feels they would like to enter your boat ? try going to your local park or swimming baths and taking pics of children or maybe you do as it is a public place , see how long before the police arrive or parents set about you .
How would you react to someone dangling a child by their feet through your roof hatch?
Do they get the police treatment?
I think some of you are really jumping the gun somewhat, either that or you spend a lot of time on the phone annoying the police.
Child cruelty if the child were to see a truly horrendous thing as he was hung upside down.
-
A quick Google found this from 15th June 2016
"A £10,000 target has been set to safeguard the future of the vessel, which was nearly towed away from its berth in Canning Dock East last month after officials at the Canal & River Trust said they were owed berthing fees and that the vessel did not have a valid hull survey.
Former radio officer Stan McNally said the survey had been sorted out, but outstanding berthing fees need to be paid to ensure the vessel can continue its role as a museum ship and a café open to the public."
https://www.nautilusint.org/en/what-we-say/nautilus-news/urgent-appeal-to-save-liverpool-lightship/
Planet has today has been seized by CRT and is being made safe for towing to someplace away from Liverpool , unpaid bills and safety reasons , LIVERPOOL ECHO story today has debt details etc.
-
Sorry to say but suggesting this rubbish about getting him onto the sex offenders register is a load of tosh. The boat is in a public place, your curtains are open (otherwise you'd not see him taking a pic, right?), its not a bedroom or bathroom clearly, so its a step too far to suggest he's trying to get dodgy pics - and if he does you must be some kind of exhibitionist.
By all means its not acceptable to be sticking a camera to photograph the interior of a boat but it seems like its just an intimidation tactic. Let's keep a sense of proportion here otherwise there's a danger you won't be taken seriously (cry wolf etc).
So a child in a state of undress , would you categorize the child as an exhibitionist , it has been described he acted in a way that his intent was clear , he was intent on a clear picture of the boats interior and activity/people present , suggests to me he is not only a bully and an idiot but a voyeur type person to boot , if it acts like a duck and walks like a duck etc etc
-
I don't get it.
There are people on here implying, but not proving, that the licencing system we have now is illegal. So how do they think the system is to be funded if no-one pays the licence?
I note that someone said they refused to accept the Terms & Conditions of their licence when they last renewed, however isn't there an "implied consent" once you have accepted the licence, no matter what was said previously?
We have as in the licence payers have , are you in fact a licence payer or are you meaning CRT HAVE .
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
I would argue that there isn't a lot of litigation going on at the moment, just a couple of cases that seem to take up an inordinate amount of webtime on this forum.
Could there be another Waterways Act? Yes there could, but I doubt that Parliamentary time will be found whilst Brexit is still in the offing, but you never know. As for what it might include, I would guess that the loopholes exploited by certain members (joyously) on here would be filled and certain things clarified, but it still wouldn't stop people trying to work out how they were exempt.
As you so often point out to others , you don't have to read them and other forums are available , the threads to which you refer have done more to help and educate boaters about the rights they have than I have seen anywhere else , your description of people exerciseing their rights as taking advantage of loopholes is truly pathetic ,
-
5
-
To be fair to the guy he eventually plans to run his water taxis on the Irwell/ship canal between the cathedral and Media City, but he can't start that service yet because of bridge building works for the Ordsall Chord rail link which have effectively closed the river.
I think he is doing this in the meantime to gain experience with the boats and the service.
I am all for him and what he is doing , its not just about how quick the journey can be done ,leisurely, relaxing and pleasant or just a mad dash to get there , I know which would be my choice
-
Great to laugh as the Isle of Man hydro goes past but it takes several minutes for the wash to reach the shore line , hundreds of people at the tide line suddenly realise a three foot wave is heading in and along the beach towards them , they try and scatter but most never make it .
I wonder if the new container ship facilty mid river has slowed the IOM BOAT DOWN
regeneration of old wharf Bootle L&L
in Waterways News & Press
Posted · Edited by gaggle
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/100m-masterplan-make-bootle-star-11973245
Maybe something more to enjoy on the passage into the Liverpool link and the south docks.